♪♪♪ male announcer: Funding for the Hinckley Report is made possible in part by the George S. and Dolores Doré Eccles Foundation and the Cleone Peterson Eccles Endowment Fund.

♪♪♪ ♪♪♪ CC BY ABERDEEN CAPTIONING 1-800-688-6621 WWW.ABERCAP.COM Morgan Lyon Cotti: Good evening and welcome to "The Hinckley Report."

I'm Morgan Lyon Cotti, associate director of the Hinckley Institute of Politics.

Covering the week we have Heidi Hatch, anchor with KUTV 2 News; Chris Blake, partner at R.R.J Consulting; and Boyd Matheson, host of KSL Insight Sources.

Thank you everyone for being with us.

This week was really interesting.

We marked one year since that January 6th attack on the US Capitol.

This is normally a very ceremonial markage of one of those peaceful transfers of power, we have Congress come in and approve those electoral college votes, and instead, we're all now very familiar with those images of violence, of destruction at our capital.

So Boyd, I want to share with you, 'cause you've been there for one of those January 6th events.

And talk a little bit about that and just reflect on this past year.

What is this--what is the same, what's different?

Boyd Matheson: Of course, it's important to remember that it is mostly a ceremonial process.

The only role that the United States Senate has is to open the envelopes and count the votes.

So it's very simple, but it is one of those moments where it's historic.

You know something significant is happening and the way it has always happened in the past.

And then of course, looking back a year ago, all of us were just horrified at those images, and for me it was very visceral, having walked through those halls a lot of times late at night.

I mean, that's sacred space for me, and so what we witnessed on January the 6th was just absolutely horrible.

But I have to tell you that my most deep impression from January 6 was the fact that 6 hours after those rioters breached the Capitol, the vice president banged the gavel, called the Senate back into session, and the work of the people went forward, and they finished their job certifying the election and moving the country forward.

And so to me, it was a little bit of, hey, it worked.

It held, the democracy held, our constitutional republic rolled forward, so despite the horrific nature of all of that, the loss of life and all of that, there is something positive out of that, and that is that the system works in this country.

And while we can be very pessimistic about the politics and that kind of division, we should still be pretty bullish on the future of the country.

Morgan: Heidi, I can see you nodding your head.

What are some of you are reflections from that day?

Heidi Hatch: I think it's important, as he said, that the country went on, but one thing that is clear to me as I've watched the last year is that we are still deeply divided, and I think both sides in Congress and even people at home are feeling that divide even more so.

And I think a lot of people were hoping that maybe that wouldn't happen, but people are entrenching and digging in on their sides, and I heard a word a couple days ago that seemed appropriate that situational ethics as people reflect on that day.

If you were to watch one channel over the other, you heard very different stories as to what happened that day, why it happened, and I don't foresee that changing.

That's the part that's sad to me is that we're a deeply divided country.

I think generally most of us are kind of in the central middle of things, and yet there's these two drastic viewpoints when we tell these stories that you're hearing it from right now.

Morgan: Congressman Curtis said something similar, and I wanna read what he said, and then, Chris, I want to hear some of your thoughts on that.

He tweeted yesterday, "After a year of reflection, two thoughts are clear to me: We need to fully understand the events of the day, so this doesn't happen again.

Our nation needs to tone down the rhetoric and start treating each other like human beings.

Instead of adversaries."

How do we do that?

How do we treat each other as human beings, as he said, and get sort of out of this adversarial viewpoint?

Chris Bleak: Well, kudos to Representative Curtis.

I think that's a great point, and I love that he said it.

I'm glad that he did.

I think those are two important things.

I guess I don't fully know.

We have had a deteriorating political situation for quite some time, and so I think there is something to talking with others and hearing different points of view.

And we do live in an age now where we congregate and, you know, end up in our spaces that voices that we'd like to hear, and I don't think that's healthy, and I don't think this helpful, and so I would encourage those to get out and talk to other people.

You don't have to agree with them.

You can disagree, that's perfectly appropriate.

Boyd talks about these kinds of things all the time, that is a perfectly appropriate to disagree with someone.

How you go about doing it and how you have that conversation is really what's important.

Boyd: That's critical, and I love what Heidi said about situational ethics and situational leadership.

It's easy--it is so easy to yell at your enemies.

It takes real courage to yell at your friends and say you're wrong, and that's part of the honest discussion we have to have in the country.

And to Chris's point, we have to--I think the biggest threat to the democracy is contempt.

It's the cancer of contempt, where if I disagree with you, then you're worthless, you're nothing, you don't mean anything to me.

So I can cancel you, I can blow up your Facebook account, I can melt down your Twitter feed, and I can still sleep at night and go to church on Sunday and feel good.

That contempt is really the issue of the day, and if we can't get past that, a lot of this other stuff is just gonna be window dressing.

Heidi: I think we talk about it all the time, social media don't you think it just--it's part of the problem where we're in that echo chamber.

You speak to people in a way you never would in real life.

And even politicians, they're trying to score points with soundbites they know it will be re-tweeted online.

And we live in a world where everyone wants that retweet, because if you say things that are reasonable you're not gonna get the retweet, right?

Boyd: Yeah, and I think just on that same on that same point, I think the fact that we've allowed our politicians to take our institutions of government and turn them into a platform for what Heidi just described so they can get clicks and retweets and raise campaign cash in a significant way, that is a big part of the problem.

And then if we the people do the same thing and we stay in our social media bubble and only read what we like to hear, that's part of the problem.

I think the other threat to democracy beyond contempt is actually a lack of curiosity.

So if I am so insulated in my bubble that I don't even wanna know, Morgan, why you think differently, if I'm not even curious about what Chris believes or why he thinks that's good policy or good for the American people, then we're really at risk.

Morgan: Chris, what is that role of leaders?

Mitt Romney also had a statement yesterday where he talked about how leaders need to take on this role.

He said democracy is fragile.

We've heard some leaders say, well, I have to listen to my constituents, and they are concerned about some of these things.

And we know some of the things like election fraud and these other things there--we have found no proof for.

So what is that role of leaders with that tension between listening to those constituents and trying to hold that solid voice of reason.

Chris: Well, one, I think I would encourage them to be bold and speak boldly, speak truth, and focus on that and be optimistic.

Let's talk about the positives that are there, the things that unite us together, the things that are beneficial about our democracy and our country.

It doesn't mean that there aren't fractures, doesn't mean that there aren't problems.

There are issues, there are things that need to be resolved, some long-standing, some more short term and temporary, but be bold and be optimistic in the way that you speak and both with one another but also with the American people.

And I can't think of anything more important than looking for optimism from our leaders about where we're headed and how we're going to get there.

Morgan: We heard yesterday from a number of our leaders, senators, member of Congress, governor, we didn't hear from others.

Were any of you intrigued by the fact that not everybody made a statement or a tweet yesterday, Boyd?

Boyd: Yeah, I think it's-- again, it's interesting, silence is also an interesting form of speech, and especially it's an interesting form of leadership, and so who spoke up and who didn't, who wanted to move on from the day, that's always an interesting debate.

I'm with Chris, I think it's about standing up, it's about speaking boldly and speaking truth to power, and again, speaking truths to your friends.

And I think we have to remember that our country was set up, the constitution was designed for big debates, open roiling debates, and we've been here before.

That's the other thing I think it's important to remember.

If you go back to Thomas Jefferson, the day he was sworn into office the headlines in the papers of the day were worried that Thomas Jefferson being sworn in after one of the most that just vicious, horrible campaigns that there was gonna be riots and maybe even a new revolution.

So we have been here before, but it really requires all of us to kind of look in the mirror, it requires leaders to lead for sure.

And I think one of the biggest things we have to face is the trust gap in the country.

So many of our voters--again, the country is a center-left to center-right country, and many of those people in the center-left and center-right are so exhausted by the far right and the far left they've disengaged from the process, and we have to create space for them to come back in and develop that trust, and that's gonna require leaders.

Currently we have leaders on both sides actually telling voters don't trust the system, if you don't win.

And you can go back to 2016 and 2020, and that's not good.

What we need is the transparency component so that we can restore trust in the system for all voters.

Chris: Boyd makes an interesting point here about institutional trust, because I think this is something we've seen a strong deterioration in, whether it's government, whether it's churches, whether it's, you know, wherever that might be coming from.

People don't have a lot of trust in the institutions.

They do feel like they are easily sort of whipsawed back and forth as the rest of us are, even our media, right?

There is not a lot of trust there, and so I think all of us--it's incumbent on all of us, those that are in those different positions to look for ways that they can rebuild trust and be speaking to people and give information that's beneficial and useful.

Now, I'm not saying that to point fingers at anyone in particular, I'm saying that all of those institutions have an important role they play in the formation of our country and its health in its strength and its vibrancy, and that has weakened, and we need to look inwards as well and say what can we do to to restore that trust?

Morgan: Absolutely, you know, it's interesting we're talking about the 2020 election, but we're already in 2022, and we have candidates that are already gearing up for this next election.

And Heidi, we are seeing Republican Senate candidates, they are all out there gathering signatures.

Tell us a little bit about what's going on and what you're seeing.

Heidi: Well, the interesting thing when you look at Senator Mike Lee's seat is how many people are running.

And I think Senator Mike Lee's probably sitting back and excited that every new person that files or says they're going to run, so that's the interesting thing.

And what we saw in the gubernatorial race, if you go back to that, it is not easy to get all the signatures you need when you have that many people running, because you can't double up on people, so it'll be interesting to see how all of that shakes out.

But in that same race we have a couple Democrats now, we have Independent, we have Ben McAdams, who I think is probably one of the stars of the Democratic party here in Utah already saying that he's not voting for a Democrat and he's voting for an Independent, so there's a lot of interesting things that play just in that Senate race alone with so many people involved, all those signature gathering out there, and a lot of people saying, you know, why are we not even giving Democrats in Utah a chance off the bat here.

Morgan: Yeah, it is really interesting.

And with that signature gathering, so because this is statewide, they each have to get 28,000 signatures.

Chris, is this a really big ask?

Are all of these Republican candidates going to be able to get those signatures?

Chris: No, simply they're not.

And I think to Heidi's point, we saw this in the governor's race.

There were well-funded campaigns that either struggled to get there or didn't get there and had to change course.

I wouldn't want to run against Mike Lee particularly in this upcoming election.

I mean, he is going to be a massive force to be dealt with.

And I hope and would suggest that Senator Lee continue to be an intellectual force and talk about the conservative ideas that have always invigorated him.

It's what I love when he gets into that, and I would hope that he puts out big ideas, because I think he's going to be difficult to beat, and so I want to see him talk about where can we go as a as a country, where can we go from the state of Utah's perspective.

And so I hope to see big ideas from him in this election.

Morgan: And Boyd, of course we have to say former chief of staff for Senator Lee, but what are you watching for in this race?

Boyd: To Chris's point, really interesting.

The fact there are a large number in there is not surprising.

Actually, when Senator Lee ran, there were nine candidates running against then Senator Bennett, so this is not a new thing in there.

I think one of the most important things--so Chris talked about Senator Lee talking about big ideas.

I actually think that is the challenge for all of those who are challenging Senator Lee.

Many of them are on a very hard mantra of being against the senator.

That never wins elections, whether you're a Democrat or Republican.

What you're against is not what matters.

People want to know what are you for?

Tell me what you're for, what's your vision?

We know you're against your opponent, that's easy, we get that, but tell me what you're for.

Because without that kind of vision, there's really-- to Chris's point--there's really no chance to really get traction and get anywhere that you need to go.

Morgan: And interestingly, in 2010 and with many primaries, they were running to the right of Senator Bennett.

You're often saying, no, I'm the true Conservative, or I'm the true Liberal if you're tryin' to primary someone.

But here we have these candidates, saying I'm actually more moderate than Senator Lee, is that--Chris, do you think that could be a winning strategy?

Chris: I think it's just challenging the way that we nominate our parties' candidates, and so I don't think that it is.

I don't think there's a lane there that's wide enough, particularly where you have two-- You know, I know both of--both Ally and Becky, smart, wonderful individuals, but they're even sort of taking from each other, and that's not a great place to be if you're trying to adopt a place to the left, if you will, of Senator Lee.

Morgan: And one other thing I know people are watching is that there's--there may be some ballot initiatives.

There are some measures that are trying to gather signatures, but as you all know, that signature threshold is based off of turn out from the previous election.

So this next year they would have to get 138,000 signatures across 26 of the 29 counties.

And Heidi, I wanna get your take on this, because one of these ballot initiatives is trying to move us back to just election day voting, eliminate that vote by mail.

What are you hearing about this?

What are voter's saying?

Heidi: I think that's going to be a tough row to hoe, because there's a lot of people who I think like getting back to the pomp and circumstance of actually voting on election day, but more so I see people who like voting from home.

They can sit there, especially when you've got a long ballot, you can go through it, make decisions, do it in your pajamas, and do it on whatever day you want, and drop it in the mailbox.

I think there's extremes on both sides where some people say it's not safe, on one side saying we've got to go back to a regular, you know, in-person voting on the left, the opposite direction.

So I just don't think there's enough of an extreme feeling in one direction or the other that they're going to be able to get those signatures, 'cause I think the average-day, everyday Utahn really likes the ballot at home, being able to look through it and vote when they're ready.

I do think it's helped more people vote in the state of Utah, so that's a lot of signatures.

Morgan: And Chris, of course, if they do get signatures, most people, a large group of Utahns now vote by mail, so they would be voting on that initiative at home, would that even work?

Chris: Yeah, that was the irony that I thought.

You know, they're going to vote from home.

Wait, do I want to get rid of this?

I mean, we--for better or for worse, we live in a what--we all want a frictionless economy, we want it easy, and so it's hard to put that horse back in the barn, right?

And I do agree with Heidi, I think there are those--myself included--that do miss the pomp and circumstance of being around your neighbors, and maybe there's even an argument to be made about we don't have the social capital that we built by being out in the community or interacting with one another, so maybe I could even get on board with that, but it's gonna be hard to put that back.

It is easier, but I think that it also--you can take more time studying it, looking through it, doesn't sneak up on you, you've got it there, and so I think that's a difficult hill to climb even if they can get the signatures.

Morgan: And then, Boyd, maybe a quick word on the congressional races.

There was a lot of talk about maybe members switching seats with redistricting, but it looks pretty settled.

They're going to be running for the districts that they were already represented, but we're seeing some challengers.

Are you expecting primaries, or do you think anyone's at risk?

Boyd: I think the delegation is fairly strong.

If there's any, it would always be the fourth congressional district.

That has constantly been the the unknown factor, I think, in the state of Utah, switched back and forth a number of times over the years.

So I think that's probably the race to watch that will be closest, but there are some interesting candidates getting in all of the districts, and again, hopefully that's a competition about big ideas and vision for the country and not just a bashing or fighting old wars.

Chris: And I would say this is a really important election for Representative Moore.

That first election is always the most significant, and I don't think that he's taking it for granted.

You see him out and about talking to voters and individuals and groups across the state, across his district, but this first election often catches people off guard.

You know, they now have a voting record, they're not--it's not the same dynamics as running that--when they're running as a challenger, as a non-incumbent, and so it's important that he really goes out strong and runs a vigorous campaign.

Morgan: Well, and I suppose we shouldn't focus too much on the fall, because in a week and a half we have Utah's State Legislature is starting again.

And Chris, I really want your thoughts on this.

I know you're so involved with the legislature.

One of the really interesting things is that the governor opened his budget, he previewed his budget at the Great Salt Lake, the speaker of the house had a big conference on the Great Salt Lake just this week.

Why is there such a focus on this, why now?

Chris: Well, I want to--I hope our leaders make sure that they recognize the Utah Utes and the Rose Bowl team, bring them up, because I want to see them and celebrate them.

So that's what I'm hoping for in this legislative session.

I think this speaks to something that we often don't recognize or give credit to to Utah political leaders.

They care about issues, and they focus on big issues.

And sometimes people say, well, they don't care about the environment.

This is a perfect example where they're saying, no, this is important to the state, it's important to the state's economy, it has such a massive impact, and we're going to put a real spotlight on it.

And I commend them for that.

You know, I think right now we're still in the socialization phase.

I mean, there's--what things can the state do, where should they focus, but I was impressed by the number of people across the spectrum that spoke about, wow, being at Speaker Wilson's event was really great, they were talking about real issues, they were focusing on things that matter, it matters to the state even if everyone doesn't fully appreciate, so kudos to them for spending that kind of time and effort on that.

Morgan: Absolutely, and there is--obviously it's important to focus on that.

What are some of those policies that we're hearing?

What are some of those concrete plans that we're hearing, Boyd, and what does the appetite also for those?

Because it's one thing to say we've got to fix this and another to see how that hits the state's wallet.

Boyd: Yeah, that's right, and we know there's already over 900 bill files opened.

I'm sure there'll be over 1,000 before they actually gavel in on the 18th, and so to me it's always interesting to look at where the focus goes.

Education of course is always gonna be a big issue.

I think one of the things that everybody should be watching, especially citizens, is when we talk about all this extra money.

There clearly is gonna be some cash flowing out of the capital through the session, but we have to really look closely at is this one-time money, or is this ongoing money?

Because we often get caught in that trap of saying, oh, we have all this extra money, let's start this new program or that new program, but then we find that it's one-time money and now we've got to pay for it ourselves.

It is sort of like the teaser rate on your credit card.

You know, it's nice that first round, and then suddenly, you know, it goes up and suddenly you're paying--trying to figure out how to pay for things you just can't afford.

Morgan: I think that is when people are looking at, can there be incentives?

Will we look at how that agriculture economy affects the Great Salt Lake.

So I think that's something we're watching really closely.

Heidi, what are--what else are you watching with the legislative session?

Heidi: Well, the devil's always in the details, and sometimes what you expect to happen isn't what happens, and sometimes those message bills takeover a lot of the oxygen of what happens in the room.

So I hope that there are some real issues that happen.

There's one bill that I'm keeping a close eye on.

I did a story about a doctor, Dr. Scott Jolly, who unfortunately a year ago in January took his life.

He was working at a hospital and had a lot of roadblocks and stumbling blocks getting in there, and Representative Elison is running a bill that would make it so that our doctors our nurses our firefighters our police officers--especially our doctors--would be able to go out of network so that you could be treated at a hospital that is not your own, where you're not having to worry about other people knowing about those mental health issues.

And that is something that's been a huge problem I think probably for decades but especially in light of the pandemic.

There's a lot of mental healthcare needed, and I think if we can clear a stumbling block for those doctors and pass a bill like that, it could make a huge difference to some of our healthcare heroes that have been having a really tough time over the last couple of years and really just in general, so I'm watching smaller bills like that that can make a real difference in people's lives, whether or not we talk a lot about those little bills instead of these grandiose ideas of CRT in the newsroom--or not newsroom, but in the classroom, but those abortion bills.

I think sometimes those message bills take up a lot of our time when there's like these smaller issues that I think really have an impact on Utahn's everyday lives.

Morgan: Very interesting, so Chris, I know this is something you're following really closely, redistricting.

And of course our legislature passed those new districts for our congressional, legislative, and our school board, but there's been an interesting story out this week.

We've heard people have-- make accusations about gerrymandering, mostly based on partisan and also race here in Utah, but there was a new article this week about religious gerrymandering and people, saying that Salt Lake County being cut up actually takes power away from basically the non-LDS population in our state.

I know you've been following this.

I want to hear some of your thoughts on this.

Chris: Yeah, a couple of things, one of the things that I think is really interesting about redistricting.

I'll note, you know, first off we have now entered the 2022 election cycle, right?

The candidates are filing and no one has yet filed suit.

I think they probably missed that point.

Obviously, anybody has access to the courts, and they can file suit, but we're now in the cycle, and so it's going to be even more difficult to change things as people have already started filing and announcing intention, so I think that's interesting.

But the other thing that really stands out to me, Dave Wasserman a number of years ago wrote an article about purple counties.

There are roughly 3100 counties in the entire United States.

Those boundaries have not really changed.

In 1992 about 1100 of them were within 10 points in the presidential election.

In 2016 it was less than 300, and so here as Americans, we're sorting ourselves, and I go back to segregating ourselves, talking--where are we putting our voices?

Who are we listening to?

Who are we talking, who are we engaging with?

And we as Americans are moving to places where we're not hearing those other voices, and so you talk about breaking up lines or keeping communities together, we're doing it ourselves.

We are moving to places where we feel like we're going to be heard, and it's our own our own place.

I just think that's really concerning to me that people are pushing themselves and not engaging, and so the lines are going to reflect that, and it's going to create some division or some partisanship when it's-- when the fight then becomes about who gets a denomination rather than the two candidates in November.

Morgan: Of course, and Boyd, maybe speak to that.

We talk so much about the echo chambers of social media, but what happens when the echo chamber is just your block or your community?

Boyd: Yeah, exactly, and it's interesting, too, that as you look at that concept of gerrymandering, really anything that we do would be gerrymandering.

If we're making Salt Lake more blue so the Democrats can have a voice in Congress, that's gerrymandering.

If we're changing it so our rural farmers have a bigger voice or an opportunity, that's gerrymandering.

And so anyone can make the case.

So it comes back to to Chris's point, and we're kinda self-isolating and self-selecting, and the interesting thing to me is is that there's always the complaint.

So in Utah we always hear the complaints coming from the Democrats or the Liberal wing of that party, in California it's just the opposite, the Republicans are always squealing about not being represented, or they divided this up so we couldn't get a seat.

And the reality is is that we-- if you're complaining about the rules or the referee, it's probably because you're losing, and there's--if there's enough Republicans in California, then things are gonna shift and change, but they have to make that case to the people and into the community, into those counties.

Same thing here in the state of Utah, you have to make the case, you have to put up the right kinds of candidates, you need to have the right kind of discussion so that people would say, yeah, I can buy into that?

Morgan: We just have 30 seconds left-- Heidi: I think it's an important reminder to run you can.

Morgan: Yeah, Heidi, I was just gonna say you have the last word, you have 30 seconds on this issue.

Heidi: Sorry to interrupt.

I just think it's so important as people are frustrated about maybe what's happening in their district or what's happening in their neighborhood to get involved, run, or find someone that you can back or support, because I think that we can all be more involved than we are, we can have a say, you can make sure your voice is heard, and so I think we can all do a better job at stepping up to the table and making sure if you're not the one to run that you find other people you can support.

And we can all do it, we can all do a better job, and we can make a difference.

So if something changes in your little district, then you'll have a voice in the legislature, and then maybe you'll have a voice in the congressional district or something else that's important to you.

Morgan: All right, thank you.

Thank you for this fantastic conversation.

And thank you for watching "The Hinckley Report."

This show is also available as a podcast on PBSUtah.org/HinckleyReport or wherever you get your podcasts.

Thank you for being with us, and we'll see you next week.

♪♪♪